Publication Cover
Global Public Health
An International Journal for Research, Policy and Practice
Volume 17, 2022 - Issue 1
183
Views
7
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

The impacts of contraceptive stock-outs on users, providers, and facilities: A systematic literature review

ORCID Icon, , , , , & show all
Pages 83-99 | Received 01 May 2020, Accepted 06 Nov 2020, Published online: 30 Nov 2020
 

ABSTRACT

Contraceptive stock-outs are a world-wide problem, yet published research on the impacts of contraceptive stock-outs have not been comprehensively reviewed and synthesised. This systematic review highlights findings about the impacts of contraceptive stock-outs on users, providers, and facilities and identifies topics that should be explored to ensure everyone can access their preferred method of contraception. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Popline, and JSTOR for studies addressing the impacts of contraceptive stock-outs. Of 435 studies, 25 publications addressed the impacts of contraceptive stock-outs. Only two articles focused solely on contraceptive stock-outs; the remaining studies examined stock-outs alongside other factors that may influence contraceptive service provision. Studies discussed how stock-outs limited individuals’ ability to use their preferred contraceptive method, influenced where contraceptive methods were obtained and how much they cost, and limited providers’ and facilities’ abilities to provide contraceptive care. Comparing the impacts of contraceptive stock-outs across studies was challenging, as reliability of stock was sometimes not distinguished from overall method availability, and studies used variable methods to measure stock-outs. Evidence presented in this review can inform efforts to ensure that preferred contraceptive methods are consistently available and accessible to all.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation (#2015-62393), the Hewlett Foundation (#2015-3031), and PATH (#OPP1066129) on behalf of the Reproductive Health Supplies Coalition. Funders had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, or manuscript preparation.William and Flora Hewlett Foundation

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.